United States of America v. Angel Luis Boza-Seas

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
ANGEL LUIS BOZA-SEAS,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 13-50001
D.C. No. 3:12-cr-02666-LAB
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Larry A. Burns, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted January 21, 2014**
Before: CANBY, SILVERMAN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Angel Luis Boza-Seas appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges the 36-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for
fraud and misuse of visas, permits, and other documents, in violation of 18 U.S.C.
§ 1546(a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
FILED
JAN 27 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

-- 1 of 2 --

Boza-Seas contends that the district court procedurally erred by imposing
sentence on the basis of its disagreement with the charge bargain offered by the
government, and by failing to consider all of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing
factors. We review for plain error, see United States v. Valencia-Barragan, 608
F.3d 1103, 1108 & n.3 (9th Cir. 2010), and find none. The district court indicated
that it was not basing Boza-Seas’s sentence on the charge bargain, despite its
disagreement with it. See United States v. Wilkerson, 208 F.3d 794, 799 (9th Cir.
2000) (finding no abuse of discretion in the district court’s “mere expression of
displeasure with a prosecutor’s charging decisions”). Furthermore, the court
adequately considered the section 3553(a) sentencing factors. See United States v.
Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992-93 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc).
Boza-Seas also contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable.
The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing Boza-Seas’s sentence.
See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The above-Guidelines sentence
is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors
and the totality of the circumstances, including Boza-Seas’s criminal and
immigration history. See id.
AFFIRMED.
13-50001 2

-- 2 of 2 --